From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 57566 invoked by alias); 5 Aug 2019 18:28:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 57556 invoked by uid 89); 5 Aug 2019 18:28:45 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy=acknowledge, H*r:112 X-HELO: simark.ca Received: from simark.ca (HELO simark.ca) (158.69.221.121) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Mon, 05 Aug 2019 18:28:43 +0000 Received: by simark.ca (Postfix, from userid 112) id 53E881F33C; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:28:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from simark.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by simark.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E1381E4A5; Mon, 5 Aug 2019 14:28:41 -0400 (EDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 18:28:00 -0000 From: Simon Marchi To: Christian Biesinger Cc: Tom Tromey , Christian Biesinger via gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add block['var'] accessor In-Reply-To: References: <20190801223420.234581-1-cbiesinger@google.com> <87y30bit95.fsf@tromey.com> <6f69d3a0-e977-71c3-bcf3-dd619cd4cf99@simark.ca> Message-ID: X-Sender: simark@simark.ca User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.6 X-SW-Source: 2019-08/txt/msg00123.txt.bz2 On 2019-08-05 14:19, Christian Biesinger wrote: > On Mon, Aug 5, 2019 at 1:17 PM Simon Marchi wrote: >> >> On 2019-08-02 9:36 a.m., Tom Tromey wrote: >> > Christian> + struct symbol *sym = block_lookup_symbol ( >> > Christian> + block, name.get(), symbol_name_match_type::FULL, VAR_DOMAIN); >> > >> > What about looking up things in other domains? I wonder if it's >> > possible to, say, have a local type that can be found by iteration over >> > the block but not by dictionary access. If so, that seems confusing. >> >> Just wondering, was this commented responded to? > > Oh sorry, in the most recent version of the patch I fixed it by using > ALL_BLOCK_SYMBOLS_WITH_NAME, which should match the behavior of the > iterator afaict. Ok, thanks! Note that it helps others (including the reviewer) if you acknowledge the comments, either with Ok / Done or "I'd rather not do that because X". Simon